References: <11253b26-cb11-8b7a-02e0-d5b1ad89e199@...277...> <2465b076-35e8-6144-f1b8-085ad5a016f0@...277...> <86ef0241-5144-206a-4691-6713434fdaa4@...277...> <20170405204236.GM93896@...1296...> <3092a563-61dd-9240-b288-190b6f5fc259@...277...> <20170406130520.GR93896@...1296...> <111c81b2-12a6-f8f7-23c0-c13a843b0e3d@...2080...> From: debbie10t Message-ID: <2e5ad66d-a568-4d97-0686-4ae7e0a782b2@...277...> Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2017 15:16:28 +0100 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <111c81b2-12a6-f8f7-23c0-c13a843b0e3d@...2080...> Subject: Re: [Openvpn-devel] [PATCH v2] Add per session pseudo-random component to --reneg-sec intervals List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: openvpn-devel@lists.sourceforge.net On 06/04/17 14:49, David Sommerseth wrote: > On 06/04/17 15:37, debbie10t wrote: >> Company A has 1,000 vpn users and (for what ever reason) they reboot >> the server every 24 hours. They experience the slow down because all >> their vpn users are permanently connected. They all connect at once. >> This patch is not trying to address the initial connect it is trying >> to address the subsequent reneg's all happening at once. > > This is not what --reneg-sec is about. --reneg-sec does not control the > initial connection. What you want here is a randomized initial > connection delay when client have lost connection to the openvpn server > and needs to do a reCONNECT. > > That is an entirely different feature than reNEGOTIATION of established > tunnels (which --reneg-sec targets). However, randomizing --reneg-sec > will improve the situation *after* the initial connect congestion, once > the first renegotiation round starts. At this point in time, things > will start to spread out. > > But I emphasize again, --reneg-sec have never tried to solve randomizing > of the _initial_ connect step. > Which is exactly what I said .. >> This patch is not trying to address the initial connect it is trying >> to address the subsequent reneg's all happening at once. Regards